IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v9y2000i3p201-210.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Setting research priorities: an example from agriculture using the Analytic Hierarchy Process

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Hartwich
  • Willem Janssen

Abstract

How should potential research outputs be compared, in order to set priorities, when a diverse range of goals and outputs is possible? This paper introduces a multiple-criteria weighting method, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), which can be applied in ex post research evaluation. AHP transforms qualitative subjective judgments into quantitative data (weights). It is a decision analysis technique. The method is illustrated with a simple hypothetical example from a sorghum research program. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Hartwich & Willem Janssen, 2000. "Setting research priorities: an example from agriculture using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(3), pages 201-210, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:9:y:2000:i:3:p:201-210
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154400781777250
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dmitriy Volinskiy & Michele Veeman & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2011. "Allocation of public funds to R&D: a portfolio choice-styled decision model and a biotechnology case study," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 34(2), pages 121-139, November.
    2. Tommi Gustafsson & Ahti Salo & Ramakrishnan Ramanathan, 2003. "Multicriteria methods for technology foresight," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2-3), pages 235-255.
    3. Eeva Vilkkumaa & Ahti Salo & Juuso Liesiö, 2014. "Multicriteria Portfolio Modeling for the Development of Shared Action Agendas," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 49-70, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:9:y:2000:i:3:p:201-210. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.